I have a problem scenario that I would like to post and ask for opinion on whether this problem is resolved at this point :

1. Users across one site report that they are unable to print
2. Multiple incidents are created and assigned to the Windows Server team(who handle file and print servers)
3. Technicians restart service and confirm that service is restored so incidents are closed
4. Incident recurr again multiple times with the work-around not being able to sustain service and provide stability. The windows print spooler service keeps crashing
5. A problem record is raised
6. Initial investigation identifes 3 recent windows patches that have been deployed without an RFC (Request For Change) logged
7. There are 4 servers onsite
8. All 3 suspected patches are removed from 2 of 4 suspected servers
9. Testing on next day shows that 2 servers that have had patches removed remain stable with no crashing of print spooler service. Whereas the other 2 serves (with patches still installed) experience the same problem
10. The most likely troublesome patch has been removed from the 3rd server and proves successful

At this stage it is known that the removal of a specific patch restores service reliably and the windows print spooler service doesnt crash anymore.

The plan forward is to schedule a change to remove this MS patch from the impacted servers.

The question I have is - Is the removal of the patch a work-around or solution. Why or Why Not ?

Last edited by Caperz on Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:44 pm; edited 1 time in total

A solution.....but its guesswork on my part. All of the evidence you have given points to that being an informed guess but thats what problem management is all about....gathering the facts and acting accordingly.

Unfortunately it requires that you have the appropriate analytical skills to be able to make these decisions rather than having hard and fast rules, but hey that's why monkeys are not problem managers (most of the time).

As to whether or not this is a solution to a problem or a work around depends on whether the patches removed are important for other areas of work - not just the print service that is being used

If the team that has not been able to print can at this time - then it is at least a work around. But... is this the right solution.

What were the patches that were removed
Were the critical MS updates or recommended patches
are the servers in questions dedicated print servers or does the servers in question provide multiiple services to the users.

As to whether to call it a work around or solution.... depends on HOW YOUR OWN ORGANIZATION decides to define this

My standard

If the solution works and no more work is to be done, then it is the solution
if the solution works and has to be re-applied or re-executed, then it is a workaround

IE - issue w/ Microsoft o/s 'd server... reboot ... this is a work around
..... replace w/unix o/s ... this is a solution.

As to whether or not this is a solution to a problem or a work around depends on whether the patches removed are important for other areas of work - not just the print service that is being used

If the team that has not been able to print can at this time - then it is at least a work around. But... is this the right solution.

What were the patches that were removed
Were the critical MS updates or recommended patches
are the servers in questions dedicated print servers or does the servers in question provide multiiple services to the users.

As to whether to call it a work around or solution.... depends on HOW YOUR OWN ORGANIZATION decides to define this

My standard

If the solution works and no more work is to be done, then it is the solution
if the solution works and has to be re-applied or re-executed, then it is a workaround

IE - issue w/ Microsoft o/s 'd server... reboot ... this is a work around
..... replace w/unix o/s ... this is a solution.

grin

Whoa there Viking....this is an unapproved change (I thought you of all people would have baulked at this). The patches may be intended as a solution to something else but putting that to one side it shouldn't have gone into production, it has caused incidents/problem and so in the context of those incidents/problem (rather than anything else that it was intended to resolve given it shouldn't have been implemented) removing it is the solution (given the results of the investigation). Those other problems you're referring to need their own working solution that doesn't negatively impact the rest of the estate.

Fire whoever put in the patches without an RFC! They won't do it again = Problem solved!

If we could change the past and an RFC had gone through, there must be a valid reason for the patches. (problem resolution? or prevention - i.e security, infamous RPC...)

By removing the patches, the original issue will be back.

So what is more important:
- (re)fixing the original problem with the patches and living with the work-around and raising the spooler crashes as a problem
- or taking the original problem back to the Problem Management team with the criteria that the patches are not an acceptable solution
?

So, to your orginal question - Removing the patches a work-around or solution - I'd call it a Problem because as it stands now - with, or without the patches will pose one problem or another.